Facebook admitted before a court that such fact-checking is not fact at all, but merely opinion.
People send me things.
Like what we have previous report, journalist John Stossel is suing Facebook after Facebook’s ‘fact-checkers’ labeled climate change information Stossel posted as “false and misleading”. In the middle of all this is the nefarious website “Climate Feedback” which features a bunch of climate aficionados writing what they consider to be “fact-checks” for articles, videos, and stories. news with which they disagree.
Facebook just released a statement “verifying the authenticity” right in court.
In response to Stossel’s defamation claim, Facebook responded on Page 2, Line 8 of the court document (download below) that Facebook cannot be sued for defamation (making a false claim and having harmful) because its ‘authentication check’ is These are just statements of opinion, not factual statements.
Opinions are not subject to defamatory statements, while false claims of fact may be libelous. Quoted in the Facebook complaint is,
“The labels themselves are not false or defamatory; on the contrary, they constitute a defended opinion. ”
So, before the court, in a legal filing, Facebook admitted that its ‘fact check’ wasn’t really a ‘fact’ check, but merely ‘statement confirmation.’
This strikes me as a public relations disaster and possibly an impending legal disaster for Facebook, PolitiFact, Climate Feedback, and other left-leaning organizations engaged in “fact-checking.” partial.
Such “fact checks” are now simply an agenda to stifle free speech and open discussion of science by masquerading as free media activities as something that is widely known. considered factual, noble, neutral, trustworthy, and science-based.
It is not one of them.
Here is the court file: